Embarassing crap on the wiki

I rewrote the "black cock" thing, by cutting the cock line which wasn't needed. Also, no need for two random black porn actresses to be listed. I cut the "glorious subversion" because, as Bad Wolf said, it ain't one. I also cut the Tangled example because I don't think it's an example at all. Someone more familiar with the film can correct me, though.

edited 28th Mar '12 8:29:33 PM by Martello

"Did anybody invent this stuff on purpose?" - Phillip Marlowe on tequila, Finger Man by Raymond Chandler.

Yaaay, I got a motion passed. I feel like a member of the senate. Or whoever pushes motions through.

I should add the mai waifu thing to prefers the 2d

I brought this up in another thread, but I think it's just as applicable here.

We're dealing with something akin to the "supply/demand" problem.

It's like Prohibition. The reason it didn't work is that they took away the supply, but the demand for the product is still there.

Same with creepiness in fanfic recs. You can take away the means for them to be displayed, but they'll still find their way onto the wiki through one of the thousands of work pages or through someone's profile, or even through the forums.

You have to eliminate the demand on this site for creepiness.

edited 31st Mar '12 2:49:45 PM by TheProffesor

a) How do you propose to do that? b) Who's going to define what's creepy? I read a ton of shoujo/BL aimed at teens which have teens having sex. I'm sure there are scads of people who would think Sensual Phrase, for example, is mad creepy. Should we drive the shoujo fans off the site? (And why the hell is that in the anime namespace? Goddamnit, will people stop putting every damn manga series under anime...)

edited 31st Mar '12 2:54:04 PM by lebrel

Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.

That is for the mods to decide. They run the site, it is ultimately they who define "creepy". If that means driving certain fans off the site, I suppose that is better than torching whole sections of the site one at a time.

Tvtrope's greatest strength is it's greatest weakness. While anyone can edit the wiki, that means anyone. Even people undesirable to the wiki.

We have a new policy about fan fic recomendations. It is not debatable. Here you go:

edited 31st Mar '12 3:07:22 PM by FastEddie

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

I've announced it in the Special Efforts cleanup thread. Should it be added to No Lewdness, No Prudishness too?

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

Is cleanup allowed, then?

"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer

Yes. Cleanup and publication of the rule as needed can go forward. It is already in the Fan Fic Recommendations text.

edited 31st Mar '12 3:14:42 PM by FastEddie

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

Can we use a different word than prurient? I'm a native English speaker and I was confused by it—I imagine any non-natives will have no idea what it means. Of course, the only other word that springs to mind is "masturbatory," which probably isn't one we want to use.

I think it's basically a summary of No Lewdness.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

What Septimus said.

It means not to write using a Lusty description, basically.

Quest 64 thread

I know that. I'm just saying that a lot of people won't.

You want permission to pothole it to No Lewdness, No Prudishness?

Also, I think the new rule should be added there.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

Hell, no. Everyone has Google. If they are here, they are online. They can look up 'prurient.' We are not here to pander people's vocabulary laziness.

edited 31st Mar '12 3:37:05 PM by FastEddie

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

About the new ruling: Just to clarify...

The way it's phrased would imply that it also encompasses fanfics where sex occurs between two adults, but at least one of whom is a Legal Jailbait due to Older Than They Look. Is that correct?

By "prurient, are you referring to the recommendation entries, or the fanfics themselves?

edited 31st Mar '12 3:58:39 PM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

It couldn't be clearer, I think, but yes, that "is really a thousand years old" crap won't fly, and it quite clearly says the recommendation is the thing that won't be prurient. The thing on our site.

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

^ But linking pornography is also against the rules without exception, right?

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff

Lebrel, we may have to do a cleanup of that manga/anime confusion, sometime.

Linking porno pictures is uncool. A fic with porn in it, as long as the porn stays out of the recommendation, would be okay.

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

Ah, OK. Thanks for clearing that up.

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff

Clean-up thread for the Neon Genesis Evangelion fic pages is in progress.

Nevermind.

edited 31st Mar '12 5:42:10 PM by Discar